Music & Nightlife

2008
Re: She Brought it On Herself

You have to admit Annie, that the “inevitable” storyline was about polls that showed Hillary Clinton with 20 point leads. (Are you saying that when a women starts ascending to power like that a backlash is somehow justified?)

What, on the other hand, is the Obama in ascendance storyline based on? Obama lost NH when he was supposed to win. And he lost Nevada (and the casinos that he was supposed to win).

Re: The puzzlement about NH. Yes, there was a reason to be perplexed and seek an explanation. After all, the polls had Clinton down and out. But similarly, wasn’t the big news about Obama in Iowa based on the fact that for most of the year-long run-up to Iowa, Clinton was seen as the frontrunner? Parallel questions. But very different answers.

The explanation in Iowa was Obama’s “historic” insurgency and his connection with voters. And the explanation in NH? Clinton played the emotion card and cunningly got the vote.

Here’s a way to think about the difference in the coverage. Imagine if Obama had won Nevada.

And when he does win SC, as he’s supposed to, the media applause will be thunderous.

Comments

You have to admit Annie, that the “inevitable” bit was about polls that showed Hillary Clinton with 20 point leads. What, on the other hand, is the Obama in ascendance storyline based on? Obama lost NH when he was supposed to win. And he lost Nevada (and the casinos that he was supposed to win).

WTF are you talking about? If there was an "Obama in ascendance" storyline ever being pushed by the media, it was primarily before the NH primaries, when he had won IA and was ahead in NH polling. It wasn't nearly so arbitrary as you imply. After NH, the press was full of "Clinton strikes back" stories.

Besides, there's a better explanation than the media hates Hillary: It's that the media is just fishing for drama. Obama coming out of nowhere is dramatic. Hillary being chosen by the Democratic establishment and gradually rubberstamped by an indifferent electorate is not. (Hillary coming back from behind to win, OTOH, is plenty dramatic, and the media would lap that up just as easily.)

Josh, the Clinton campaign chose to push the inevitable line--even though national polls very early in the race are soft and always reward the best-known figure. I'm not denying there's a pro-Obama bias, remember? I even admired that Howard Kurtz piece about it. But nothing is sweeter than to see arrogance and presumption taken down a peg, and so the fact that the media have been hard on HRC is not surprising. The same thing is going on in the Republican race with Giuliani and McCain.

And god! Resorting to rape analogies is almost as bad as crying Hitler. I'm not saying she asked to be raped! Ugh. I'm saying her campaign positioned itself as the heir apparent, which was galling to many people.

Hillary's actions--well mostly Bill's it seems the idea that this would NOT be a co-presidency has gone out the window since Iowa--have made me realize the Clintons are out for the Clintons. Not progressivism. Not liberal ideas. But making sure Team Clinton is in the White House. Even if long term it sets the Democratic Party back 20 years.

I am so saddened. In fact, I've lost so much respect for those two if it becomes a Clinton/McCain race in the general election I may consider McCain.

And the circular firing squad continues! Hillary's a snob (better than a bitch, I guess), and she's "out for herself" (unlike every other politician in human history, Obama included), and she's "not liberal" (despite scorecards that indicate that she is liberal in American terms, going by her voting record), and people are going to vote for Republicans instead (yeah, that'll help).

Meanwhile, Josh's post that sparked this bullshit is itself the same bullshit ECB was pushing earlier today, and it smells just as bad warmed over. No, there is no anti-Clinton bias in coverage (nor is there an anti-Obama slant).

Anyone who's talking about voting for a Republican because they don't like Hillary Clinton should just shoot themselves in the head, because that's what they're asking the country to do to itself. Get over your fucking crush on a politician, get over your barely-suppressed misogyny (or racism, for some of the anti-Obama crowd), and think for a few seconds about the actual reality of politics in this country, and how to get what we want. Politics is no place for temper tantrums.

Politics is also no place for voter fraud. And based on what my contacts in Nevada have told me, the Clintons did just that.

I am old-fashioned and I do vote based on character and personality. Hence my leanings (and 3 out of 4 independants) for McCain or Obama over Hillary or Romney.

I think the Clintons have damaged the Democratic Party just as GWB has damaged the GOP. I'm not misogynistic because I don't think a former first lady with an attack dog husband is uplifting for women. I'd like to think the USA could produce a Gold Meier, that we didn't go all Third World and do dynastic families who get in via lying and fraud.

Politics is also no place for voter fraud. And based on what my contacts in Nevada have told me, the Clintons did just that.

I am old-fashioned and I do vote based on character and personality. Hence my leanings (and 3 out of 4 independants) for McCain or Obama over Hillary or Romney.

I think the Clintons have damaged the Democratic Party just as GWB has damaged the GOP. I'm not misogynistic because I don't think a former first lady with an attack dog husband is uplifting for women. I'd like to think the USA could produce a Gold Meier, that we didn't go all Third World and do dynastic families who get in via lying and fraud.

Will people stop crying bias! Just as in football, it's always the refs bias toward one team or another.

The fact is the media says good and bad things about all candidates because there are good and bad things about all these candidates. The only bias is the media's penchant for making up headlines to justify their existence even if there is no real story. They are only biased in the sense of selling as much advertising space as possible. If they need a story on bat-boy to sell, well, they'll find bat boy.

@5 me too. but i'd consider the three supreme court positions possibly coming open during the next administration. that's the only thing that would keep me from voting mccain in a billary/mccain election.

I cannot possibly conceive of how anyone could EVER labor under the notion that Hillary Clinton is better poised to defeat John McCain in a presidential election. Ever.

Nor can I conceive of where in the world I'm going to go when McCain winds up trouncing her.

But fear not, Clinton supporters. You can bask in the post-Super Tuesday afterglow for a whole two or three days after your victory, before the bloodbath begins and the nation we know is finally irreversibly ruined.

Judith @ 12: Good point! Thanks for reminding me of that. In light of that I'd probably begrudgingly vote for Clinton even though I think the Clintons are hurting the party overall. John Paul Stevens is one of the most liberal (and appointed by a Republican--Ford) justices and he is quite elderly.